Ken Balcomb calls for further review of orca’s death

Ken Balcomb, the dean of killer whale research in Puget Sound,
is asking federal authorities to reopen the investigation into the
death of L-112, a young female orca who died two years ago of
mysterious causes.

Ken
Balcomb

Ken maintains that an underwater “blast” remains the mostly
likely cause of death for the whale, who was known as Sooke — or
Victoria, as Ken originally named her.

A
draft final report (PDF 2.3 mb) by the National Marine
Fisheries Service, dated Feb. 24, states that “blunt trauma to the
head and neck is the prime consideration for the cause of
mortality. Despite extensive diagnostic evaluation, the cause of
the head and neck injuries could not be determined.”

The official investigation could find no military operations in
the area off the Washington/Oregon coast, where the young whale was
found dead on Feb. 11, 2012. In looking for a cause of the trauma,
the report essentially rules out several underwater explosions set
off by the Canadian Navy a week before, on Feb. 4, 5 and 6 off
Vancouver Island. These activities occurred too far north — and
prevailing winds and currents were in the opposite direction,
according to the report.

But Ken Balcomb argues that the report fails to fully consider
how L-112 could have ended up south of these military exercises.
Currents are not certain, he said. They can change, and eddies can
even flow in the opposite direction from prevailing currents. Ken
also raises the prospect that a dead or dying orca calf could be
carried a great distance by other members of the pod.

“I consider the evidence presented in the NMFS report to be
selected and filtered to depict a preferred hypothetical scenario,
rather than one that may be more realistic,” he wrote to NMFS, the
federal agency in charge of protecting marine mammals.

Report:“The absence of right cerebral
hemisphere and right cerebellum of the brain was secondary to loss
of tissue during disarticulation of the head. Significance is
uncertain based on imaging alone, but unilateral loss of brain
tissue is unusual.”

Ken’s comment:“UNUSUAL! The right cerebral
hemisphere and cerebellum were completely mushed and there was
evidence of hemorrhage in the calvarium, both significant findings
of brain damage from a blast impact. The observation is consistent
with blast trauma.”

On the ear bones:

Report:“The CT results showed no evidence
of bone fractures or damage to the middle or inner ear bones. These
results do not conflict with gross observations and the proposed
cause of acute or peracute death by blunt force trauma; however,
blast- or seismic-related injuries cannot be
entirely discounted.”

Ken’s comment:”Upon gross dissection both
tympanic bullae were found to be dislocated from their fragile bony
pedestals anchoring them to the cranium. While it may be accurate
to say that no evidence of fractures or damage to the middle or
inner ear bones on the CT scans, it is misleading to infer that no
damage was evident to the ears (see page 11 of Necropsy
report).”

On possible attack by another marine
animal:

Report:“The primary signs of injury reported
from aggressive attacks are rake marks, musculoskeletal and/or
intra tissue trauma (bruising, tearing) attributed to ramming and
sometimes death. Contrary to the cases reported in the literature,
L-112 was a juvenile animal (older and larger than a calf or
neonate), and the examiners did not document tooth rake marks
associated with the signs of hemorrhage they observed during the
gross examination. Nevertheless, we cannot rule out the possibility
that L-112 suffered injuries from an aggressive attack, such as
ramming, by a larger animal.”

Ken’s comment:“The presumed hypothesis
suggested by the last sentence is absolutely preposterous, given
the evidence of a massive single traumatic event causing the mortal
injury. To not rule out the attack hypothesis while ruling out
blast trauma is ludicrous.”

On currents:

Report:“Because of prevailing currents and
eddies it is unlikely that L-112 died in Canadian waters or the
Strait of Juan de Fuca and drifted south, but instead likely died
in the Columbia River plume or farther to the south along the coast
of Oregon. Given the state of decomposition at the time of
stranding the body was either carried by eddies for several days or
may have drifted a substantial distance from the south before being
trapped by the eddies and cast ashore on the Long Beach
Peninsula.”
Ken’s comment:“The drift patterns can be quite
different from year to year, as well as from season to season, or
even week to week. It is regrettable that drifters were not
deployed near the west entrance to the Strait of Juan de Fuca in
February 2012. There was a NOAA cruise in these waters at that
time, and I asked the chief scientist to deploy drifters or some
identifiable devices to ascertain the real time drift pattern at
that time. One can surmise from the temperature regimes that were
documented real-time that there was an anomalous cold water regime
moving in a southerly direction in February 2012, but there were no
current measurements.”

On the possibility of transport by another
orca
Ken’s comment:“I further request that the
investigation team thoughtfully consider the relevant cetacean
epimeletic behavior … (He mentions two studies.) Hoyt (1981) in
‘Orca, the Whale Called killer” on page 92 states: ‘Among
cetaceans, and especially the dolphin family (including orca),
care-giving behavior to sick or wounded family members seems
exemplary. Moby Doll was supported by members of his family after
he was harpooned in 1964. On another occasion off the B.C. coast, a
young killer whale was hit by a government ferry boat, the
propeller accidentally slashing its back. The ferry captain stopped
the boat and watched a male and a female supporting the bleeding
calf. Fifteen days later, two whales supporting a third –
presumably the same group — were observed at the same
place.'”

Ken concludes his remarks with this: “These comments are
dedicated to L86 and L112, the most overtly affectionate
mother/offspring pair of whales I have ever seen. Rest in peace,
L112. We miss you.”

4 thoughts on “Ken Balcomb calls for further review of orca’s death”

God Bless Ken Balcomb for all he’s done for orca over very many years. If anyone knows his stuff, it’s him. His findings warrant a further review.
Thank you Ken, for being such a greatly, renowned and resounding voice for the orca!

We are so fortunate to have a human being with the skill, intelligence, experience, and compassion toward especially the Southern Resident Orcas as Ken Balcomb, as well as the courage to fight for them and the truth. His argument is spot on.